<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (4) TMI 160 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326046</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the additions made by the AO for both assessment years. It held that the anonymous donations received by the charitable society through golaks were exempt from taxation under Section 115BBC(2) as the society was established wholly for religious and charitable purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on the detailed examination of the society&#039;s activities and judicial precedents that supported the overlap between religious and charitable purposes. The appeals filed by the Department were dismissed, and the orders of the CIT(A) deleting the additions for both assessment years were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2016 10:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422566" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 160 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326046</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)&#039;s decision to delete the additions made by the AO for both assessment years. It held that the anonymous donations received by the charitable society through golaks were exempt from taxation under Section 115BBC(2) as the society was established wholly for religious and charitable purposes. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was based on the detailed examination of the society&#039;s activities and judicial precedents that supported the overlap between religious and charitable purposes. The appeals filed by the Department were dismissed, and the orders of the CIT(A) deleting the additions for both assessment years were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326046</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>